Law360 (September 10, 2026, 7:36 PM EDT) -- The Eleventh Circuit has vacated a felon's gun-possession conviction, saying police lacked reasonable suspicion to search him after noticing a gun protruding from his hoodie pocket because Florida law treats concealed carry as presumptively legal.

The three-judge panel ruled that detectives in Miami did not have reasonable suspicion to detain and search Olson Joseph merely because he appeared to have a gun. U.S. Circuit Judge Kevin C. Newsom said in the opinion that "because Joseph's concealed carriage was presumptively lawful, it did not alone establish reasonable suspicion."

The decision overrides Eleventh Circuit precedent that predated a 2015 change to Florida law establishing a presumption that people carrying concealed weapons are doing so legally.

Joseph was getting a haircut in the front yard of a Miami home that was under surveillance by two police detectives with the Miami-Dade Police Department. The detectives began investigating the house in October 2022, believing it was connected to possible drug activity following a fatal drive-by shooting at the location, the opinion said.

As Joseph left the property, the detectives noticed that his hands were in the front pocket of a hoodie and saw what they believed was the outline of a firearm. The detectives emerged from their unmarked vehicles with their guns drawn and ordered Joseph to put his hands up, the opinion said.

Joseph complied and one of the detectives removed the gun from Joseph's pocket and handcuffed him. The detective then frisked Joseph and removed a cellphone from his pocket, the opinion said.

A record check was then run on both Joseph and the gun, and the detectives discovered that Joseph was a convicted felon who did not have a concealed carry permit. The detectives called for a marked patrol car, and Joseph was arrested, the opinion said.

A grand jury charged Joseph with one count of being a felon in possession of a weapon, and he moved to dismiss the indictment, claiming that the law violated his Second Amendment rights. Joseph also moved to suppress the firearm recovered, arguing that police lacked probable cause and that the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights, the opinion said.

A federal district court ruled that because the stop was a Terry stop — named for the high court ruling that police may stop and frisk individuals based on a reasonable suspicion that they're involved in a crime — and not a full arrest, police needed only reasonable suspicion that Joseph was engaged in criminal activity. The court said that given the "totality of the circumstances" — including that Joseph had a gun and was in a "high-crime" area where a homicide had occurred — police had reasonable suspicion to search him, the opinion said.

Joseph entered a guilty plea following his unsuccessful effort to have the indictment dismissed and the weapon suppressed, but reserved the right to appeal the suppression motion. The district court accepted the plea and sentenced Joseph to just under four years in prison, the opinion said.

Joseph appealed, arguing again that the indictment violated his Second Amendment rights and that the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The Eleventh Circuit found that while circuit precedent foreclosed his Second Amendment argument, Joseph's Fourth Amendment argument warranted suppression of the gun in his case, the opinion said.

The panel ruled that contrary to the district court's conclusion, there is no bright line between a Terry stop and a full arrest as far as the Fourth Amendment is concerned and courts must apply a balancing test. The panel found that simply possessing a concealed weapon is no longer sufficient for police to establish reasonable suspicion, the opinion said.

The panel also found that the "totality of the circumstances" argument from the district court was insufficient. The panel said that Joseph's presence in a 'high-crime' area and at a home believed to be connected to drug sales was insufficient to warrant searching him, the opinion said.

An attorney representing Joseph and a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida did not respond to a request for comment.

U.S. Circuit Judges Embry Kidd, Kevin C. Newsom and Barbara Lagoa sat on the panel for the Eleventh Circuit.

The government is represented by Daniel Matzkin, Jonathan Colan and Tory D. Roberts of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida.

Joseph is represented by Andrew Scott Jacobs, Michael Caruso and Anshu Budhrani of the Federal Public Defender's Office for the Southern District of Florida.

The case is USA v. Olson Joseph, case number 23-11857, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

--Editing by Rich Mills.

For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.